WeakenDiff: Easy

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: The author suggests that since computers can do the math, engineering students don't need to learn the theory behind it anymore and should study other things instead.

Conclusion: Engineering programs should reduce the time spent teaching fundamental mathematical principles to make room for other subjects.

Reasoning: Because computer programs can now solve complex engineering math problems, it is no longer necessary for engineers to understand the underlying principles themselves.

Analysis: The argument relies on the assumption that being able to use a tool (the software) removes the need to understand the mechanics behind what the tool is doing. To weaken this, we should look for a reason why an engineer still needs that 'old school' math knowledge. For instance, if an engineer can't spot a software error without understanding the principles, or if they need the principles to set up the problems correctly, the author's recommendation falls apart. Look for an answer that demonstrates a practical necessity for theoretical knowledge.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

1.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given for the recommendation above?

Correct Answer
A
It directly undercuts the argument’s central assumption. If effective use of these programs itself depends on understanding mathematical principles, then math knowledge remains necessary, and reducing math in the curriculum is not justified.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep